Legislature(2019 - 2020)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/13/2020 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB155 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 155 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 13, 2020
9:04 a.m.
9:04:44 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair von Imhof called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Natasha von Imhof, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel; Chad Hutchison, Council for the
Senate Majority.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Ramona Monroe, Mining Attorney, Alaska Miners Association;
Greg Beischer, Alaska Miners Association; Deantha Crocket,
Executive Director, Alaska Miners Association.
SUMMARY
SB 155 EXPLORATION & MINING RIGHTS; ANNUAL LABOR
SB 155 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 155
"An Act relating to exploration and mining rights;
relating to annual labor requirements with respect to
mining claims and related leases; relating to
statements of annual labor; defining 'labor'; and
providing for an effective date."
9:06:00 AM
SENATOR CLICK BISHOP, SPONSOR, discussed the bill. // He
expressed that that bill was a "due process" bill for
miners. He referenced Section 8, Article XI of the state
constitution.
9:07:38 AM
CHAD HUTCHISON, COUNCIL FOR THE SENATE MAJORITY, addressed
a presentation entitled "COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SPONSOR
SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL 155 (CSSSSB155(RES))," (copy on
file). He detailed that the bill was a multi-year process
bill that had been in the works since the Walker
Administration.
Senator Bishop pointed out that the current administration
embraced the concept of the bill and had worked closely
with the sponsor.
9:08:45 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at Slide 2, "This Bill is about Mining
Rights":
? Mining A large part of Alaska's past, present, and
future.
? Alaska Constitution Article 8, Sec. 1 General
Policy
? Encourage development of the resources
? Alaska Constitution Article 8, Sec. 11 Mineral
Rights
? Designed for miners out in the field?not lawyers.
Pursuant
to Governor Dunleavy's "Open for Business" Policy.
? Based on "real world" experience.
Mr. Hutchison noted that there was an increase in interest
in integrated electrical systems in the Lower 48 and Alaska
could play a part creating conductors for electricity. He
said that the American Energy Innovation Act had an
emphasis on mineral security and that many minerals were
found in Alaska. He shared that mineral rights were
established at statehood and were based on statements of
annual labor, paying rents, royalties, and fees. He said
that the bill was based on real world experience. He noted
that helpful statistics were available.
9:11:01 AM
Senator Bishop relayed that the most recent update he had
received indicated that the economic benefits of mining
would be realized by the passage of the bill. He related
that $4 billion had been spent in the state on mining
exploration since 1981. He said that capital was waiting
on the sidelines for the legislation to pass. He noted
that there were over 600 small mines in the state that had
produced over $105 million in 2016. He furthered that the
economic impact to the state from small mining operations
was considerable.
9:12:27 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked to look at Slide 2. He assumed that
the photo on the slide was a placer miner. He wondered why
he was mining in a three-piece suit.
Senator Bishop thought the photograph looked like the miner
was on the beach in Nome.
Mr. Hutchison thought the attire was a sign of the time.
9:13:43 AM
Mr. Hutchison moved to Slide 3, "EXAMPLE":
? Small miner in Alaska
? Small typo in date.
? Was forced to refile his claim.
? Tremendous risk! Top filing is an issue.
? Lost investment/equipment/time.
? Hurt production for Alaska.
Mr. Hutchison said that the slide focused on due process
and proper notice.
Senator Bishop noted that the slide had been shown to each
office as an affidavit of annual labor. He thought the
fourth bullet was the most important. He emphasized that
the current law did not protect miners rights or provide
for due process.
9:14:58 AM
Mr. Hutchison noted that the typo referenced on Slide 3 was
a date, which constituted abandonment and placed undue
stress on the miner.
9:15:21 AM
Mr. Hutchison referenced Slide 4, "SECTIONS 1, 2, 3
DEAL WITH QUALIFICATIONS":
Section 1 AS 38.05.190(a) is amended -
Qualifications
Adds that mining rights can be acquired by:
? Conservators of minors or incapacitated adults;
? Individuals at least 18 years of age or older
who have declared their intentions to become
citizens of the United States;
? Limited Liability Companies (LLCs);
? Registered trusts (with a qualified trustee)
9:16:21 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof asked about the first bullet point on
the slide. She asked about the meaning of the bullet point.
Mr. Hutchison explained that guardianship existed in
statute and allowed for the guardian to protect the miner.
The update, he thought, would apply to small mining
operations such as placer mines in the Interior of the
Alaska.
Co-Chair von Imhof suggested that the bullet point widened
the net for guardianship. She addressed the second bullet
point and asked whether there was a time limit for
individuals that had declared their intentions to become
citizens.
Mr. Hutchison stated there was no time limit in the
legislation. He offered to provide more information at a
later date.
9:18:38 AM
Mr. Hutchison turned to Slide 5, "SECTIONS 1, 2, 3 DEAL
WITH QUALIFICATIONS (CONTINUED)":
Section 2 AS 38.05.190(b) is repealed and reenacted
An unqualified person may become qualified or transfer
the interest to a qualified person within 90 days
after the department sends written notice. If the
defect is not cured, the department may make a "void"
declaration.
Mr. Hutchison explained that the intent was to ensure the
ability for [proper notice, due process, and the ability to
cure in a timely manner.
9:19:45 AM
Mr. Hutchison considered Slide 6, "SECTIONS 1, 2, 3 DEAL
WITH QUALIFICATIONS (CONTINUED)":
? Section 3 - New subsections are added to AS
38.05.190. These are new subsections (c), (d), (e),
(f), and (g).
? (c) - If the department learns that an unqualified
person has acquired an interest, the department shall
send written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to the most recent address on file.
? Interest will be void unless cured or transferred
within 90 days.
? DNR may send an additional copy of notice by regular
mail.
? (d) Failure to comply will result in a "void."
However, there shall be no "void" declaration if the
person becomes qualified.
? (e) An unqualified person can cure either before
or after receiving notice. However, a person may not
cure if there has been "void" declaration. If "void" a
person cannot re-stake for one year
Mr. Hutchison thought it was an important facet of
operations that proper notice be given to miners.
9:21:16 AM
Senator Olson had experienced that miners were not checking
their mail regularly because their work took them far away
from the post office, which meant that they certainly would
not be available to receive a certified letter. He wondered
how to ensure a person was not taken advantage of by an
unqualified person trying to file on top of them.
Mr. Hutchison noted that the subject was being addressed,
and the bill proposed to add an additional layer of notice.
9:22:31 AM
Senator Wielechowski asked about Section 2 and Section 3
and asked about the definition of an "unqualified person."
Mr. Hutchison went back to Slide 4. He replied that
examples would be a miner that did not have a conservator
or an incapacitated adult that did not have a conservator.
Senator Wielechowski wondered how such a person could
acquire an interest it they were unqualified.
Mr. Hutchison responded that the person could have received
the claim through a will or some way through a small family
community.
Co-Chair von Imhof noted that there were experts available
to answer questions.
9:24:04 AM
RAMONA MONROE, MINING ATTORNEY, ALASKA MINERS ASSOCIATION
(via teleconference), explained that a miner might acquire
a mining interest without being qualified. She said that
under current law, a limited lability company (LLC) would
not be qualified. She related that some people might not be
aware of that fact and transfer their mining interest to
LLCs and the question was whether that invalidated their
interest. She stated that there were things that could
happen that would cause someone to acquire the interests
before they became qualified.
9:25:42 AM
Mr. Hutchison displayed Slide 7, "SECTION 3 - CONTINUED
? (f) If the unqualified person fails to cure the
defect within 90 days after the department sent
written notice, the department may declare the
exploration or mining interest "void" and open to
location. There shall be no third-party location or
judicial action within those 90 days.
? (g) "qualified to do business in this state" means
holding a certificate issued by the
Commissioner of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development (necessary to do business in the state).
9:26:52 AM
Mr. Hutchison highlighted Slide 8, "SECTIONS 4,5 DEAL WITH
MINING CLAIMS":
? Section 4 AS 38.05.195(b) Establishment of
deposit rights when using the Meridian, Township,
Range, Section, and Claim system (MTRSC). How does
MTRSC work? Location of a claim is based on ground
locations of quarter sections, or, quarter by quarter
sections of a township on a rectangular survey system.
The locator marks the claim, using the MTRSC system in
good faith. The corners are marked on the ground of
the claim, in the event of a conflict. The system is
approved by the commissioner.
? Adds: a valid MTRSC system location establishes
rights to deposits within the section that are open to
claim staking at the time of location.
9:27:27 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at Slide 9, which showed a photograph
of a State Mining Claim Location Certificate. He described
the legal description of the claim as shown on the
certificate, which showed a detailed computer sketch.
9:28:07 AM
Mr. Hutchison addressed Slide 10, "SECTIONS 4,5 DEAL WITH
MINING CLAIMS":
? Section 5 AS 38.05.195(d) Changes in locations
and amended notices.
? Eliminated unnecessary language and focused on a
simple procedure outlined in AS
38.05.200. Notices can be amended at any time to
correspond with the amended locations, if it does not
interfere with the rights of others. If there was an
error in the notice or certificate of location, an
amended certificate of location shall be recorded in
the same manner and with the same effect as the
original certificate.
9:28:50 AM
Mr. Hutchison advanced to Slide 11, "AFFIDAVIT OF ANNUAL
LABOR," which showed an example of what the affidavit
looked like. He explained that the affidavits sometimes
contained handwritten notes describing annual labor. He
described the various fields on the document.
9:30:16 AM
Senator Olson considered the labor affidavit and asked
whether the form would be filled out by minors working a
claim. He asked about protection through child labor laws.
Mr. Hutchison stated that the labor would be varied.
Senator Bishop stated there were some exemptions in the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development, such as
overtime rates. He offered to provide more information
regarding the child labor topic after consulting with the
department. He spoke to money spent on a claim, the labor,
how annual labor was calculated.
9:32:46 AM
Senator Olson reiterated his concern about child labor
issues, and how to ensure that miners could work with
families without getting in trouble.
Senator Bishop deferred to the Department of Labor.
Co-Chair von Imhof discussed guidelines and limits around
work on fishing boats. She thought there were common sense
guidelines that could dictate child labor.
Senator Olson thought that the bureaucratic issues
surrounding mining claims clearly already lacked common
sense.
Co-Chair von Imhof thought the topic might be addressed by
an invited testifier.
9:34:43 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at Slide 12, "SECTIONS 6,7,8,9 DEAL
WITH ANNUAL LABOR":
? Section 6 AS 38.05.210(a) - Outlines clear
guidelines for performance of annual labor
Performing annual labor means that the miner is
working the ground and trying to produce.
? Added:
? Annual labor performance may include adjacent
federal/private mineral interests held in common.
? May include adjacent mineral interests.
? Expenditures may be made on or for the
benefit of any one claim, leasehold
location, etc.
? Labor shall be performed at the following
rates:
? $100 for each claim;
? $400 for each quarter section MTRSC claim
? $100 for each partial or whole 40 acres of
each mining claim not established using the
MTRSC system.
? For not more than five consecutive years, the
claim holder may make a cash payment instead of
performing annual labor.
Mr. Hutchison reiterated that the intent of the changes in
statute was to increase mining production in the state.
9:36:18 AM
Mr. Hutchison showed Slide 13, "SECTIONS 6,7,8,9 DEAL WITH
ANNUAL LABOR":
Section 7 AS 38.05.210(b) - Clarifies the
information found in a statement of annual labor
? Added:
? Individual signs the statement to certify that
it is true and correct to the best of the
individual's knowledge.
? The statement must include:
? The assessment work year
? The name and land administration number assigned by
the department
? Every meridian, township, range, and section in
which the mining claim is located
? The recording district
? The total amount of work required
? A description of the labor performed
? The value of the labor performed (including excess
labor value from previous year)
? The name and mailing address of the owner designated
to receive notices
9:36:40 AM
Mr. Hutchison referenced Slide 14, "SECTIONS 6,7,8,9 DEAL
WITH ANNUAL LABOR":
? Section 8 AS 38.05.210(c) - Allows for statements
of annual labor to be corrected at any time (before
"invalid" declaration)
? Added:
? The statement of annual labor, whether recorded
before or after the effective date of this Act,
may be corrected
or amended before the 90-day cure period.
? The corrected statement of annual labor shall
be recorded like the original.
? A corrected statement may not be applied
against labor required to be done during a
subsequent year.
? A corrected statement shall be recorded in 90
days.
? Removed:
? 2-year threshold has been removed. In other
words: There had to be a correction within two-
years.
9:37:49 AM
Mr. Hutchison turned to Slide 15, "SECTIONS 6,7,8,9 DEAL
WITH ANNUAL LABOR":
? Section 9 AS 38.05.210 Added new subsections
(e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k)
? (e) A single statement of annual labor may be
recorded for the benefit of more than one mining
claim.
? (f) - A timely recorded statement of annual labor is
prima facia evidence of performance.
? (g) The department shall not declare a mining claim
invalid based on a deficiency in a statement of annual
labor until 90 days after written notice.
? Certified mail
? May send additional copy sent via regular mail
? (h) If person fails to correct in 90 days, the
department may make a "invalid" declaration. No 3rd
Party location or judicial action within those 90
days.
? (i) - A decision to declare a location invalid based
on a deficiency in a statement of annual labor must be
issued no later than five years after the date of the
annual labor is recorded.
? (j) - Failure of a co-owner to contribute shall be
treated in accordance with AS 38.05.215-AS 38.05.235.
Mr. Hutchison considered Slide 16, "AS 38.05.215-AS
38.05.235 WHAT DO THOSE STATUTES SAY?":
? A non-contributing co-owner may be required to
forfeit their interest to the other co-owner, after
direct written notice or 90 days public notice in a
local newspaper of record from the contributing co-
owner.
? If a forfeiture occurs, within 120 days, the co-
owner that claims forfeiture shall record in the
recorder's office where the claim is located:
? Copy of notice
? Affidavit of service
? Affidavit of co-owner
? Must include that delinquent amount has not be
rectified.
? If a lienholder on an unpatented mining claim, the
lienholder may perform annual labor to prevent
forfeiture.
? Notice must be sent to the address of owner.
? Lienholder work shall be reimbursed. Must be
properly recorded 90 within completion.
? A lawsuit may be filed to enforce a lien after
notice of the claim of lien.
? A lien for performance of annual labor must be done
in good faith to protect interests.
9:40:27 AM
Mr. Hutchison discussed the slide.
9:40:43 AM
Senator Bishop interjected that the department did look at
the affidavits every time a minor submitted for an
application. He thought the bill would allow the miner to
cure the issue and retain their ground.
9:41:18 AM
Mr. Hutchison displayed Slide 17, "SECTION 10 DEFINES
"LABOR"":
? Section 10 Labor includes:
? Work performed in good faith on a mining claim,
leasehold location, or mining lease that is directly
related to exploring for, developing, or producing
minerals, including:
? Excavating, tunneling, drilling, or clearing land
? Constructing or maintaining roads, trails, and
landing strips
? Extracting or producing ore
9:41:36 AM
Mr. Hutchison highlighted Slide 18, " "LABOR" CONTINUED":
? Performing metallurgical analyses, environmental
studies, economic feasibility studies, engineering,
and permitting
? Constructing settling ponds, water supplies, and
other utilities
? Providing worker housing
? Performing reclamation activities under a
reclamation plan
? Transporting workers and equipment in the state to
or from a mining site (not to exceed 50% of the total
value of labor in the statement of annual labor for
the assessment year)
? Conducting a geological or airborne survey by a
qualified expert and verified by a detailed report
that sets out:
? The location of the survey
? The nature, extent, and cost of the survey
? The name, address, and professional background of
the person conducting the work
9:42:20 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at Slide 19, "SECTION 11 DEFINES
ABANDONMENT":
Section 11 AS 38.05.265(a) and (b) - Clarifies
"abandonment"
? (a) - Failure to perform labor or make improvements
or make a payment in lieu of labor, timely record a
certificate of location or statement of annual labor,
timely pay annual rental, or timely pay any required
production royalties constitutes abandonment.
? A locator may not relocate the claim until one year
after abandonment.
? Removed:
? A statement of annual labor that does not accurately
set out essential facts is void and has no effect.
? If an annual rental or a royalty payment is
deficient but is otherwise timely paid, abandonment
does not result if full payment is made within the
period described in the deficiency notice from the
department or 30 days after a final judgment
establishing the amount due (if the deficiency amount
due was contested).
Mr. Hutchison noted that if there was no labor, no rent,
and no royalty payments then the claim could be abandoned.
He pointed out the removal of the harsh penalty for a small
typo.
9:43:46 AM
Mr. Hutchison addressed Slide 20, " SECTION 11 CONTINUED":
? (b) Added "rents and royalties." The language now
states that unless another person has located on the
abandoned claim or leasehold location (or the area is
closed to mineral location), a person may cure the
failure to record or pay rents or royalties (that led
to abandonment) by:
? Properly recording the certificate of location or
statement of annual labor;
? Paying any required rental or royalties; and
? Paying the penalty equal to the annual rent from the
mining claim or leasehold location.
9:44:03 AM
Mr. Hutchison advanced to Slide 21, " SECTION 12 AS
38.05.270 - TRANSFERS":
? Clarified that the evidence of the sale, lease, or
other transfer of mining property or interest in
mining property be recorded, but eliminated existing
language which stated "OR SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE
DIRECTOR IN COMPLIANCE WITH SUCH REGULATIONS AS THE
COMMISSIONER MAY ADOPT].
? Why? The removed language was too vague. What
"regulations?" Clarity and a "streamlined process" was
sought for the miners.
9:45:02 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at Slide 22, "SECTION 13 DEALS WITH
RECOGNITION OF LOCATIONS":
?Section 13 AS 38.05.275(a) - Ensures that mining on
state selected land located on or after an active
unpatented federal mining claim may be located only
with recorded permission of the unpatented federal
mining claim holder.
Mr. Hutchison stated the section of the bill was a
clarification provision.
9:45:34 AM
Mr. Hutchison spoke to Slide 23, "SECTION 14 AS 38.05.283
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW":
? DNR is not required to go back and unilaterally look
though their files for "compliance issues."
Mr. Hutchison detailed that Section 14 was added in Senate
Resources Committee and stressed that DNR was not required
to go back through their files to search for requirement
issues.
9:45:58 AM
Senator Wielechowski was concerned with Section 14 of the
bill. He thought the section gave broad latitude to the
department to ignore laws. He gave the example of the
requirement in Section 3 that the department shall send
notice but then Section 14 removed the requirement.
Mr. Hutchison thought Senator Wielechowski's instincts were
correct. He elaborated that if a third party came forward
this would be a different scenario but left to its own
devices the department was not required to look back
through files without cause.
9:47:38 AM
Senator Wielechowski maintained his concern with the
section. He thought the section could lead to harsh due
process issues. He urged more thought on the section.
Mr. Hutchison thought the sponsor was open to clarifying
language in the section.
Senator Bishop thought Senator Wielechowski was raising a
good point. He explained that a claim application process
was rigorous.
9:49:01 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof suggested Senator Wielechowski work with
the bill sponsor and reference the relevant conversation in
the Senate Resources Committee.
9:49:20 AM
Mr. Hutchison referenced Slide 24, "SECTIONS 15, 16, 17
DEAL WITH APPLICABILITY, THE TRANSITION PROCESS, AND THE
EFFECTIVE DATE":
Section 15 - Clarifies applicability
Section 16 - Ensures a smooth transition process (for
regulations).
Section 17 Immediate effective date.
Mr. Hutchison showed Slide 25, "Questions?"
Senator Bishop addressed Senator Olson's question about
child labor under AS 23.10.330 He noted that child labor
law has an exemption that allows a child to work for a
company owned by the parent, when supervised by the parent,
this applies to all businesses including mining claims.
9:50:44 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof solicited further comments or questions.
Senator Olson mentioned controversy surrounding the
proposed Pebble Mine. He cited that most recently there was
a graphite mine near Nome. He mentioned a company called
the Rivers of Gold that was planning on mining on the
Solomon River and in Golovin Bay. He asked what the bill
would do to allay the concerns of the resident population
of that area that the mining operation would not disrupt
their way of life.
Senator Bishop thought there was quite a regulatory
permitting process any mine had to go through. He mentioned
the graphite deposit north of Nome, which had been slowed
in its permitting process due to concerns voiced by the
locals in that area. Residents had expressed concerns and
now the department was doing due diligence with local
tribes. He stated all the bill would protect smaller mines
and ensure that capital flowed into the state.
Co-Chair von Imhof solicited further questions for the bill
sponsor.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if Senator Olson wanted to pursue
the topic of child labor.
Senator Olson thought the cited statute had spoken to his
concern.
9:54:16 AM
Ms. Monroe expressed that she had worked in a volunteer
capacity with the Alaska Miners Association for several
years. She said that the question of mineral tenure arose
frequently in her practice. She thought there were many
issues that were not addressed in law that the bill helped
to clarify.
9:55:35 AM
GREG BEISCHER, ALASKA MINERS ASSOCIATION (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. He stated he
was president and CEO of Millrock Resources Inc. He said
that he hoped to discover a great treasure like the Greens
Creek Mine. He said that international partners were
invited to participate in mineral investment to find new
mines in the future. He said that mineral titles were
paramount to the work. He lamented that other countries did
not always have titles. He opined that security of mineral
title was not clear in the state and that the bill would
correct that issue. He provided some examples of the
importance of clear mineral title to claims. He shared the
ways that his company had lost their claims due to unclear
mineral title.
9:59:41 AM
Mr. Beischer continued his remarks. He stressed that
certainty of title was critical to mining work. He said
that attracting capital to the state was difficult because
investors were wary of the unclear claim ownership and
mineral title. He encouraged passage of the legislation.
10:02:00 AM
DEANTHA CROCKET, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA MINERS
ASSOCIATION (via teleconference), testified in support of
the bill. The association had been working with the
Department of Natural Resources to refine the final
language of the bill. The legislation was a product of
several hours of working with all involved parties. She
wanted to address Senator Olson's question about mail
distribution. The 90 days was the timeframe settled on
after extensive conversation about what was reasonable when
considering all factors. She contended that miners should
take some responsibility and have some accountability in
making sure that their affairs were in order.
10:05:23 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof thanked the testifier for the
information.
Ms. Crocket continued to address various questions from
committee members. She related that care had been taken to
not put additional burden on DNR and she reminded the
committee that the department had suffered significant
budget cuts over the previous years. She stressed that DNR
should not be required to arbitrarily review every labor
affidavit as they did not have the resources to so.
Co-Chair von Imhof thanked her for bringing the issue up,
as Senator Wielechowski would work with the sponsor on the
issue.
Ms. Crockett thanked the committee for taking up the issue
in the legislation. She indicated that there was nothing in
the bill that took up environmental issues.
10:07:46 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof OPENED Public Testimony.
10:07:56 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof CLOSED Public Testimony.
10:08:05 AM
Senator Bishop addressed the fiscal note with an OMB
component number 3002. He pointed to the second page
regarding the DGF fund request:
To implement this act DNR will need 2 additional
Natural Resource Specialist I's to research
deficiencies in qualifications of mining right holders
and annual labor affidavits, review deficiency
assertions, issue written notices, adjudicate whether
cures to these deficiencies have been made, issue
decisions including whether or not a mining rights are
voided or invalidated.
As the bill will require DNR to adopt new regulations
and assume additional obligations, DNR anticipates the
bill will require the following expenditures.
Personnel Cost- $148.7 total annually
Co-Chair von Imhof indicated that a person from DNR was
available for questions. She would be setting the bill
aside.
Co-Chair von Imhof reviewed the agenda for the following
Monday meeting at 9:00 a.m.
SB 155 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
10:10:19 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 155 Presentation v. G 2.24.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/13/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 155 |
| SB 155 Sectional v. G 2.24.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/13/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 155 |
| SB 115 Explanation of Changes v. G 2.24.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/13/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 115 |
| SB 155 Sponsor Statement v. G 2.24.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/13/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 155 |
| SB 155 - Support Testimony Provided by Sponsor 2.28.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/13/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 155 |